Apple's Intel move not without issues


Sun Baked

macrumors G5
May 19, 2002
14,874
57
What are the issues?

Unless he is talking about the inability to buy a Dell with Mac OS X on it, or this misconception...
Indeed, making such a shift requires software developers to rewrite their programs and customers to pony up the bucks to buy those new versions, on top of the updated hardware. That's tough to swallow, particularly for consumers and smaller businesses — the core of Apple's users.
 

Mitthrawnuruodo

Moderator emeritus
Mar 10, 2004
13,595
142
Bergen, Norway
Total cr*p article...

This has been pointed out one MILLION times lately, but obviously there's still someone who doesn't get it: Apple is a hardware company that makes an OS and accessories to go, why kill the hardware division, which stands for 90-95% of the revenue to boost OS X sales...??? It just doesn't make sense...

And where did the article writer get a Mac mini running 10.2...? :confused:
 

ham_man

macrumors 68020
Jan 21, 2005
2,265
0
Article said:
Blah Blah Blah I'm an idiot Blah Blah Blah
Apple's hardware is what keeps it afloat. They would be stupid to turn OS X into Windows...
 

dejo

Moderator
Staff member
Sep 2, 2004
15,725
447
The Centennial State
Apple could have countered that inevitability by also selling the Mac OS in a version that any Windows user could install on an existing PC, or allowing companies such as Hewlett-Packard or Dell to sell Intel-based Macs. Doing so would have put Apple on an even footing with Microsoft, whose Windows operating system can be installed on any machine that will run it.
I bolded that bit for a reason. What the heck is that supposed to mean? Mac OS X can be installed on any machine that will run it. In fact, any OS out there can be installed on any machine that will run it. This is a non-statement.
 

solvs

macrumors 603
Jun 25, 2002
5,693
1
LaLaLand, CA
There were so many inaccuracies in that article, I can't believe he got paid for it. Contructive criticism I can take, but this is just bad. I would feel sorry for him for all the flames he is going to get from zealots, but he kinda brought it upon himself. It's called fact checking dude, you might want to try it sometime.
 

GodBless

macrumors 65816
Jan 22, 2005
1,005
0
solvs said:
There were so many inaccuracies in that article, I can't believe he got paid for it. Contructive criticism I can take, but this is just bad. I would feel sorry for him for all the flames he is going to get from zealots, but he kinda brought it upon himself. It's called fact checking dude, you might want to try it sometime.
There are a lot of news articles out there like this, especially from cnet. This guy sounds how the average PC user does when they haven't ever touched a mac before. Hey it sounds like me 2.5 years ago. :p And boy am I glad I switched.

Ignorant PC users.
 

bwintx

macrumors 6502
Jul 17, 2002
322
225
A Houston columnist's objectivity? :)

Yep, it was a steaming load, that column. Was particularly amused by this comment:
Apple fans seem split on whether it's a good thing, with some harking back to the company's mid-1990s shift to PowerPC processors from IBM and Motorola, which put a serious dent in the Mac's market share.
-- showing his total ignorance of Apple's source for PowerPC CPUs. :)

OTOH, does one seriously expect objectivity from a guy writing from Michael Dell's backyard?
 

arkmannj

macrumors 68000
Oct 1, 2003
1,551
299
UT
junk article

hmmm if apple opened up OSX to all PC's I would do one of a 3 things.


1) Still buy Apple branded systems and enjoy the integration level that I expect from Apple.

2) If Apple stopped making complete systems and only did the OS (like windowz) then I'd likely switch to using an OSS option. (a flavor of *nix)

3)just not upgrade for a long while and see how things pan out.
 

mklos

macrumors 68000
Dec 4, 2002
1,896
0
My house!
If Apple was to license its OS to other vendors, Apple would be out of business in 2 years or less. 75%+ of Apple's revenue's/profits come from computer sales, not the iPod, or OS X sales, or ITMS sales. The computers are what Apple makes its money on.

I know a person who insists that Apple stop making hardware and become a software company. He's a complete idiot IMO.

Apple tried licensing its OS back in the mid-90's and it lost HUNDREDS of MILLIONS of DOLLARS, if not Billons of dollars. It makes absolutly no sense at all for Apple to license its OS out to others. It it what makes a Mac a Mac, not the processor, or other hardware. I'm thinking that all new MacTels will have Intel Motherboards in it instead of Apple designed boards. If that is true, then OS X will be what makes a Mac a Mac.
 

24C

macrumors 6502a
Nov 9, 2004
519
0
mklos said:
If Apple was to license its OS to other vendors, Apple would be out of business in 2 years or less. 75%+ of Apple's revenue's/profits come from computer sales, not the iPod, or OS X sales, or ITMS sales. The computers are what Apple makes its money on.
...snip...
Agreed, but Apple have "licensed" their hardware in the HP iPod arrangement...and IMO they must still make a little money on this, but not as much as going it alone.
The biggest difference with the Apple & Intel processors move and what happened before it appears you'll be able to run Windows, a competing platform, realtime without VPC on your Mac...so you'll still get great design, OS X, Apple iLife stuff and great compatability with your Apple hardware. So your Apple produced hardware is more flexible than your competition.

If they did license OSX to an Intel box provider like say HP, how many hardware sales would Apple lose? I really don't know but they would get a percentage of the increased marketshare revenue and future OSX upgrade business as well, and it wouldn't stop me buying Apple hardware.
The question you have to ask, is how many Mac users would buy a cheaper non Apple produced box, and how many switchers would do so also. I for one am glad they don't make printers (StyleWriters :eek::) and scanners anymore.
 

Dont Hurt Me

macrumors 603
Dec 21, 2002
6,056
6
Yahooville S.C.
Anyone who thinks the hardware division has saved apple or its software side has it 100% wrong. The only thing ever saving Apple has been its great OS not it stale performing hardware. Sure apples hardware looks nice but is 2nd rate in performance and has been for many years. Its the software folks and the longer Apple stops selling it to the public the longer it is before Apple ever becomes a major player in the market. You arent going to be a major player holding onto hardware that sells at 3-5% of new sales. Wake up ! Steve Jobs did.
 

Veldek

macrumors 68000
Mar 29, 2003
1,790
1
Germany
Dont Hurt Me said:
Anyone who thinks the hardware division has saved apple or its software side has it 100% wrong. The only thing ever saving Apple has been its great OS not it stale performing hardware. Sure apples hardware looks nice but is 2nd rate in performance and has been for many years. Its the software folks and the longer Apple stops selling it to the public the longer it is before Apple ever becomes a major player in the market. You arent going to be a major player holding onto hardware that sells at 3-5% of new sales. Wake up ! Steve Jobs did.
I think you missed the point. It's the fact that people have to buy the hardware if they want the OS. That's what saves Apple.
 

wrldwzrd89

macrumors G5
Jun 6, 2003
12,106
73
Solon, OH
GarageBand

The reason GarageBand can't be obtained for older Macs without a DVD drive is that the GarageBand installation files take up more space than is available on 1 CD, and Apple's Installer technology doesn't permit splitting an installation across multiple disks yet.

Other than that, I agree with the other posters that didn't like the article very much.
 

Dont Hurt Me

macrumors 603
Dec 21, 2002
6,056
6
Yahooville S.C.
Veldek said:
I think you missed the point. It's the fact that people have to buy the hardware if they want the OS. That's what saves Apple.
and so 95% of the world went elsewhere. thats the facts. Microstink won, now how long does it take apple to wake up on this part of its business equation? If you have a great product (software) and refuse to sell it the world who;s fault is that? Apple refuses to sell a OS to 95% of the planet so it can hold onto its 3-5%hardware sales??? Whatever ,
 

Mitthrawnuruodo

Moderator emeritus
Mar 10, 2004
13,595
142
Bergen, Norway
Dont Hurt Me said:
and so 95% of the world went elsewhere. thats the facts. Microstink won, now how long does it take apple to wake up on this part of its business equation? If you have a great product (software) and refuse to sell it the world who;s fault is that? Apple refuses to sell a OS to 95% of the planet so it can hold onto its 3-5%hardware sales??? Whatever ,
Again... look at the history: Apple is a hardware company, the only reason they make Mac OS is to sell computers... why is this so hard to understand...? :rolleyes: :confused:
 

shamino

macrumors 68040
Jan 7, 2004
3,386
130
Purcellville, VA
Dont Hurt Me said:
Anyone who thinks the hardware division has saved apple or its software side has it 100% wrong. The only thing ever saving Apple has been its great OS not it stale performing hardware. Sure apples hardware looks nice but is 2nd rate in performance and has been for many years. Its the software folks and the longer Apple stops selling it to the public the longer it is before Apple ever becomes a major player in the market. You arent going to be a major player holding onto hardware that sells at 3-5% of new sales. Wake up ! Steve Jobs did.
It's the OS that keeps the Mac users happy and keeps them coming back for more.

But it's the hardware sales that provide enough money to keep Apple in business. And the OS lock-in, whatever you think of it, is the only thing that keeps people buying Mac hardware instead of el-cheapo PC's.

You're right that Apple would die if not the the OS. But they would also be dead if they allowed that OS to run on other people's hardware.

Releasing Mac OS for the entire world might (and this is a big longshot) make Mac OS the dominant OS, but the world would be running it on non-Apple hardare. Apple would become marginalized out of existance. Much like what happened to IBM's PC division - they ceased to be a significant player in the industry over 10 years ago and they invented the entire platform.
 

shamino

macrumors 68040
Jan 7, 2004
3,386
130
Purcellville, VA
wrldwzrd89 said:
The reason GarageBand can't be obtained for older Macs without a DVD drive is that the GarageBand installation files take up more space than is available on 1 CD, and Apple's Installer technology doesn't permit splitting an installation across multiple disks yet.
The installer issue is a minor point. They could fix that if they wanted to.

The bigger issue is that Garage Band is a heavyweight app. It uses a lot of CPU and memory. I think it is reasonable to assume that anybody who has the capability of running this app at a useable speed already has DVD-ROM or Combo drive installed.
 

Sun Baked

macrumors G5
May 19, 2002
14,874
57
Hopefully Apple's marketing team will make these reporters look like a bunch of dim bulbs.
 

shamino

macrumors 68040
Jan 7, 2004
3,386
130
Purcellville, VA
Mitthrawnuruodo said:
Again... look at the history: Apple is a hardware company, the only reason they make Mac OS is to sell computers... why is this so hard to understand...? :rolleyes: :confused:
I wouldn't say the only reason. I'm sure most people in Apple see it as far more than simply a conduit for hardware sales.

But there is also no question that the money from hardware sales is what pays everybody's salaries.
 

mklos

macrumors 68000
Dec 4, 2002
1,896
0
My house!
Dont Hurt Me said:
and so 95% of the world went elsewhere. thats the facts. Microstink won, now how long does it take apple to wake up on this part of its business equation? If you have a great product (software) and refuse to sell it the world who;s fault is that? Apple refuses to sell a OS to 95% of the planet so it can hold onto its 3-5%hardware sales??? Whatever ,
Like I said before, Apple licensed their OS almost 10 years ago and lost Billions of dollars because of it. Apple cannot survive another early 90's crisis. That will totally end Apple once and for all. Apple doesn't make nearly as much money off its software than it does its hardware. Why, because Apple is a hardware company, not a software company. Sure, Apple makes great software, but that doesn't make it primarily a software company. Apple isn't in business to sell Final Cut Pro to everyone, its in business to sell computers. In a way, the iPod is a hardware tool, to get non-Mac users to buy Macintosh Computers. You just don't make any sense by saying that its stupid for Apple not to sell OS X to PC vendors. If they did that, then everyone would buy the ****** $399 Dell with OS X on it, and say the hell with the Mac. Apple wouldn't make any money off it, because they don't make as much money off software sales as hardware sales. Hardware sales would go in the toilet, and Apple wouldn't have the R&D funds to keep developing OS X any further. So, Apple would pretty much be out of business in a couple of years after they did that.

The one thing Apple really, really, needs to do is ADVERTISE!!!! I say this time and time again, I don't know why they don't advertise their computers. There are actually people out there that have no idea that Apple makes computers, only the iPod and the ITMS. You can't rely totally on the iPod as a free advertisement for its computers. I know people that don't even know Apple makes a $499 Mac, but they know the iMac and PowerMac which cost more than double the price of the MacMini, so they think that Apple Macs are expensive. They have the best hardware in the industry, and some of the best software to go with it, and the most important people, upper lower class/middle class people don't know about this unless you're in touch with technology constantly. Actually, a lot of people who are in technology don't know about Apple's current offerings either. Bottom line, Apple needs to spend some of its 7 Billion in cash and advertise their Macs.
 

law guy

macrumors 6502a
Jan 17, 2003
997
0
Western Massachusetts
mklos said:
Like I said before, Apple licensed their OS almost 10 years ago and lost Billions of dollars because of it. Apple cannot survive another early 90's crisis. That will totally end Apple once and for all. Apple doesn't make nearly as much money off its software than it does its hardware. Why, because Apple is a hardware company, not a software company. Sure, Apple makes great software, but that doesn't make it primarily a software company. Apple isn't in business to sell Final Cut Pro to everyone, its in business to sell computers. In a way, the iPod is a hardware tool, to get non-Mac users to buy Macintosh Computers. You just don't make any sense by saying that its stupid for Apple not to sell OS X to PC vendors. If they did that, then everyone would buy the ****** $399 Dell with OS X on it, and say the hell with the Mac. Apple wouldn't make any money off it, because they don't make as much money off software sales as hardware sales. Hardware sales would go in the toilet, and Apple wouldn't have the R&D funds to keep developing OS X any further. So, Apple would pretty much be out of business in a couple of years after they did that.

.
Not necessarily disagreeing with this, but I would point out the difference between opening up on x86 vs. the prior Mac Clone. The prior power computing / Moto clones didn't really expand the base much b/c it was still unique hardware that folks had to buy to run the OS. So APple lost out on hardware sales where people were buying the Moto processor machines. The difference here is that Apple would be going after folks that wouldn't otherwise switch because either they don't want to spend the hardware / software money or have large investments in x86 systems. The potential sale of billions of copies of the OS may make sense, esp. if Apple continues to sell its hardware to folks who want a certain design quality / look / level of integrated system that's higher - and if that's only 2 or 3 percent of the computer market - hey, they're no worse off. In the meantime, they're making money off the billions of potential Windows users - including opening up large enterprise license possibilities. So, my point is that this would just be different than the non-market expanding mac-clone experiment and could open up NEW revenue. It would make sense that they've got market analysists figuring out whether they make more on hundreds of millions / billions of OS sales and what sort of halo effect that might create for hardware and what the liklihood of the typical apple customer not buying apple hardware if there was something "less apple" out there running the OS.

Yes - they DO need to do some advertising! That's frustrated me since 92.
 

shamino

macrumors 68040
Jan 7, 2004
3,386
130
Purcellville, VA
law guy said:
...The difference here is that Apple would be going after folks that wouldn't otherwise switch because either they don't want to spend the hardware / software money or have large investments in x86 systems.
Who you intend to sell to is far less important than who will actually buy the product.
law guy said:
The potential sale of billions of copies of the OS may make sense, esp. if Apple continues to sell its hardware to folks who want a certain design quality / look / level of integrated system that's higher - and if that's only 2 or 3 percent of the computer market - hey, they're no worse off.
You're kidding yourself. Almost nobody buys Macs because they like the quality of the hardware. They buy them because you have no choice if you want to run Mac OS.

Right now, the music and movie industries buy Macs because they're what you have to buy in order to run the software. If Apple allows that software to run on generic PC's, that entire industry will jump ship and start buying their systems from HP/Compaq, because that's where they're already buying their file servers and non-media systems from.

The home users will start buying from Dell, because they cost less.

Schools will abandon the platform altogether, because the people making the purchasing decisions don't know squat about technology. They'll say "buy Dell" because the hardware is chaper, and then they'll say "we're not paying extra for Mac OS on these Dells".

If Apple follows your example, they will end up selling nothing but iPods, because the Mac evangelist community isn't big enough to sustain Apple's entire hardware manufacturing division.
law guy said:
In the meantime, they're making money off the billions of potential Windows users - including opening up large enterprise license possibilities.
What makes you think any of these people will switch?

Do you think an IT department cares about Mac OS? They only want their users to go away. Forcing them to support two different operating systems isn't going to happen. And switching the entire company over to a new OS is even less likely, because it would cost millions of dollars to train the entire staff.

As bad as Windows is, everybody knows it and is used to it, which means any attempt to switch to something else will cost a lot of money and will make your users angry.

Maybe you can do this if you're a small startup company, but it's completely out of the question if you're one of these "large enterprise" companies.